Where one defendant didn\u2019t file a motion to suppress but joined in a renewed motion to suppress of a codefendant, the motion is treated as waived. The procedure attempted circumvents Rule 12. Moreover, he doesn\u2019t even have standing. United States v. Thompson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203129 (E.D. La. Dec. 11, 2017).<\/p>\n
The probation supervision condition on defendant might have been unlawful under state law, but not clearly so. Besides, it was relied on in good faith to search defendant, and defendant\u2019s arrest was clearly attenuated from the allegedly invalid arrest warrant under Herring. United States v. Wade, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 202971 (D. Ore. Dec. 11, 2017).*<\/p>\n
Email search warrant is not suppressed. It clearly showed probable cause for a bribery scheme.
\nUnited States v. Percoco, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203580 (S.D. N.Y. Dec. 11, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Where one defendant didn\u2019t file a motion to suppress but joined in a renewed motion to suppress of a codefendant, the motion is treated as waived. The procedure attempted circumvents Rule 12. Moreover, he doesn\u2019t even have standing. United States … Continue reading